All towns · newbury

Meeting Minutes

Document

1 | P a g e 
 
Planning Board 
April 21, 2026 
FINAL 
 
Board Members Present:  Chris Hernick, Vice Chair; Michael Bedard, Gary Keane, Wayne 
Seaholm, Richard Wright, Members. 
 
Public: Whitney Hilton, Dan Bruzga, George Chadwick, John Quinn, Greg Swick, Peter Coffin, 
Thomas Sokoloski, Aran Lafontaine, Scott Wheeler, Deborah Wheeler, Patrick Dombrowski, 
and others. 
 
Mr. Hernick opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. 
 
ADMINISTRATIVE: 
 
Minutes: 
 
The Board reviewed the minutes from the March 17, 2026, Planning Board meeting.  
 
Mr. Wright made a motion to accept the minutes as written. Mr. Bedard seconded the 
motion. All were in favor. 
 
CASES: 
 
Mr. Hernick asked if the Board would consider swapping the order of the cases and hear the 
preliminary design review before the conditional use permit to clarify the site plan information 
before getting into the conditional use permit. 
 
Mr. Seaholm questioned if this would be okay since Mr. Millette is not here. Mr. Seaholm was 
concerned that Mr. Millette was not aware of this change. Mr. Seaholm asked if Mr. Hernick 
thought it was in the best interest to change the order around and Mr. Hernick said he said he 
thinks it is in the Board’s best interest to change. Mr. Hernick proposed voting on this change on 
the agenda. 
 
Mr. Hernick made a motion to swap the cases around. Mr. Bedard seconded the motion. 
All were in favor. 
 
Case 2026-001 - Preliminary Design Review Site Plan – OKB, LLC (owner), db Landscaping 
and Bedford Design (agents) for Preliminary Design Review – Site Plan proposing six detached 
hotel units/cabins located at Route 103B, Newbury, NH, Tax Map 007-579-239 (Continued from 
February 17, 2026). 
 
Mr. Hernick invited the applicant to approach the Board to give a quick recap of the project. Mr. 
Bruzga introduced himself and his team. He gave a brief recap of the project and said there were 
updates from when they last presented to the Board. 
 

2 | P a g e 
 
1. The applicant has redone the drawings based on the public and Board’s past input. 
2. The applicant attended both an LSPA meeting and a Newbury Conservation Commission. Mr. 
Bruzga said the Conservation Commission meeting went very well. 
 
Mr. Bruzga said they have been in touch with both the Highway Department and the Police 
Department but have not heard back from either department. 
 
Mr. Bruzga said the following changes have been made since they last presented to the Board: 
 
- Mr. Bruzga said the Shoreland Overlay Plan now shows Chandler Brook. 
- The Applicant has reduced the impervious surface on site to less than 18.2% from about 20%.  
- The Applicant decreased the impact within the 75’ wetland buffer by a bit. 
- They have added a catchment area for the well. 
- An architect has done a design review. 
- One unit will be an ADA accessible unit with a pathway to the parking area. 
- They reduced their parking a bit, but there will be two spaces per unit with a couple spaces for 
the fire department to be able to turn around. 
- They have changed the width of the road coming in from 20’ to 24’ as per the request of the 
Board and the Fire Chief. 
- They currently have all of the State permits including: Septic permit, Dock permits, DOT 
driveway permit, Shoreland Permit.  
- They will be building a huge septic system because rules have recently changed and they will 
need to put a two bedroom for each unit. 
- They updated the lighting plan with layout and fixtures. 
- Bedford Design did a stake out so all Board members could go out and take a look at the site. 
- They updated the snow storage plan. 
 
Ms. Hilton said when they met with LSPA and the Conservation Commission, they showed how 
this property is not unique to this area and is in a spot with other hotels and tourism.  
 
Mr. Bruzga showed some photos of the current conditions of the lot. He does not think you will 
see the cottages from the lake.  
 
Mr. Bruzga made the service building smaller. 
 
Mr. Hernick opened up to questions by the Board.  
 
Mr. Wright asked about the location of the well and is wondering if the well can be placed 
different than right next to the swamp. He said he has concerns about it being contaminated 
being right next to the swamp. Mr. Wright thinks it should be moved back a bit. Mr. Bruzga said 
they are adhering to the geologist’s recommendation to treat it like a public water supply in terms 
of well radius. Due to this, the well is placed in a certain location because they are trying to treat 
the stormwater. Mr. Bruzga said they will hire a company that does this and to be certain there is 
no contamination from the swamp. Mr. Wright said if they were to move it 15’-20’ it will be 
better than putting it in the swamp. Mr. Chadwick said they will take a look at this. 
 

3 | P a g e 
 
Mr. Bruzga said they will look more into this and move the well if they can. 
 
Mr. Bruzga said the water will be coming into the service building in case they need to have it 
filtered. 
 
Mr. Keane said the location of the septic system seems to be a high ground with big boulders and 
wants to know how this will work. Mr. Wright said they would pump to it. Mr. Bruzga said they 
did a test pit and the design was approved based on the analysis. Mr. Bruzga said he was trying 
to be cognisant of the neighbors and therefore put the septic system in between them and the 
units. Mr. Bruzga said the boulders will go back to the surface to make things look natural. 
 
Mr. Chadwick said it is a state approved septic system. He said they are surface boulders. 
 
Mr. Bedard asked if generators are going in. He said smaller generators might go in.  Mr. Bruzga 
said he would like to add a permanent generator to the site plan. 
 
Mr. Hernick said you can very clearly see the neighbors near the last unit. He is glad to see 
screening on the landscaping plan. Mr. Bruzga said they will add vegetation and it will be 
screened. 
 
Mr. Hernick opened up public input. 
 
Mr. Quinn said he is there to protect the lake and make sure the purity of the lake is preserved. 
Mr. Quinn said he appreciates all the changes that were made. He said the right of way has a lot 
of conditions on it and one of the conditions is that on both sides of the fence they need to have 
room to push snow. He said when the applicant builds the barrier, they need to be aware of the 6’ 
snow removal area. 
 
Mr. Bruzga said they are happy to make changes as needed. 
 
Mr. Swick said the Planning Board has never noticed the Sunapee Planning Board or the 
Regional Planning Board. Mr. Hernick said they were noticed informally because they are still in 
the preliminary stages. He said when it gets to the final stages, they will notify them formally.  
 
Mr. Swick said he did a survey of Chandler Brook this past weekend. He said there is a 
beavering pond on the other side of Route 103B. He said it has pushed water back through the 
culvert and has increased the level of water on that property. He sent some pictures along to 
show the Board. 
 
Mr. Coffin said Mountain View Lake is a small precious lake. He said it is a 12% slope on that 
lake and it fills up extremely fast with a lot of discharge. He said there is a 23’ drop between 
Mountain View Lake and Lake Sunapee. That is a lot of water to get downhill. He hasn’t heard 
anything about the dam. He said it has no improvements since 1928 when it was put in.  
Mr. Swick does not understand the Shoreland Permit showing Chandler Brook. Mr. Bruzga said 
they were required to show Chandler Brook as well as the lake. Mr. Hernick said they do have an 
approved shoreland permit in the application. 

4 | P a g e 
 
 
Mr. Hernick read the following two letters into record that were received in support of this 
project: 
 
 

5 | P a g e 
 
 
 
 

6 | P a g e 
 
Mr. Bedard asked if the dock gets pulled in the winter and Mr. Bruzga said yes, it would be 
pulled in the winter.  
 
Mr. Seaholm asked about the units all being the same and Mr. Bruzga said they will all have 
pitched roofs.  
 
Mr. Hernick said that Mr. Millette had hesitation about was if these are residential units in which 
would density allow for this. Mr. Hernick personally thinks they fit into the hotel/motel which 
our zoning does not define.  
 
Mr. Bruzga said Mr. Beauchemin of the Conservation Commission said the difference is that it is 
a kitchenette not a full kitchen. The kitchenettes would have a mini fridge, microwave and sink. 
 
Mr. Seaholm asked about how many amps will be going into each unit.  Mr. Bruzga said he 
thought they were around 50-60. Mr. Bruzga said there would be a disconnect at each unit. 
 
Mr. Seaholm asked about the space between unit 5 and unit 4 that goes from the Lake to the 
pond. Mr. Seaholm also asked about the number of units. Mr. Bruzga said they already reduced 
the amount of units they were hoping for. They originally were going to put in 8 units. 
 
Mr. Keane asked if they would build these units in stages, and Mr. Bruzga said they would do 
the whole project at once. 
 
Mr. Hernick closed the case. 
 
Case 2026-003- Conceptual Use Permit – OKB, LLC (owner), db Landscaping and Bedford 
Design (agents) for Final Approval Conditional Use Permit for development in a wetland buffer 
located at Route 103B, Newbury, NH, Tax Map 007-579-239. (Continued from February 17, 
2026). 
 
Mr. Bruzga showed the conditional use permit and what is within the 75’ buffer. The applicant is 
requesting a conditional use permit for the driveway because it was determined by the DOT and 
they need to have a permit from the Town of Newbury. Mr. Bruzga said there is a stormwater 
basin planned as well as infiltration trenches next to all the paving, and there will be native 
vegetation to protect the wetlands. Mr. Bruzga said they have implemented a stormwater plan as 
described above. The parking spaces will be pervious. Mr. Bruzga said the 24’ width for the 
driveway has been added and the service building has been made smaller. He said they are going 
to limit the sodium chloride used onsite in the winter and they will use calcium chloride and sand 
instead.  
 
Mr. Chadwick said they do have a stormwater maintenance plan that will be adhered to. 
 
Mr. Hernick asked the Board members if they had any questions. 
 
Mr. Hernick asked how they felt about approving a conditional use permit even though they are 
still in the preliminary stage. 

7 | P a g e 
 
If the Board decides to rule on this, they will need to address all three items in 8.7.1.  
 
Mr. Sokoloski said drainage from this development would go toward the wetland and vegetation. 
The stormwater management will happen within the buffer in between the development and the 
wetlands. There will be a basin that will collect runoff from the parking area, the driveway and 
rooftop runoff. 
 
Mr. Hernick opened up to public input. 
 
Mr. Coffin asked if there has been any research on the impact to Mountain View Lake, not just 
Chandler Brook and Lake Sunapee. 
 
Mr. Sokoloski said a small area does drain toward the lake, but most goes toward Chandler 
Brook. Most roof runoff will go in the ground, not toward the lake. 
 
Mr. Chadwick said the entire site has been graded toward the wetland. All the area toward the 
lake is the pervious walkway and the firepit area. 
 
There being no more comment, Mr. Hernick closed public input. 
 
Mr. Hernick said they need to go through each three requirements of 8.7.1separately. 
 
Mr. Seaholm wants to wait to vote until the Chair is in attendance. Mr. Bruzga said they are 
really looking to move on this. 
 
Mr. Hernick asked Mr. Finneral about whether they can continue and Mr. Finneral said there is a 
65-day rule once the case is opened to make a decision.  
 
Mr. Hernick asked if the applicant would want to waive the 65-day rule. 
 
Mr. Bruzga asked if they can go through the three requirements even though it will not be voted 
on. 
 
1. The use cannot be implemented outside of the wetland buffer.  
 
Mr. Bedard said he is satisfied. Mr. Finneral reminded Mr. Seaholm that anyone has 30 days to 
appeal if Mr. Millette did not agree with the findings. Mr. Hernick said that he is satisfied as 
well.  
 
2. The location in the wetland buffer will have the least impact. Mr. Hernick asked if the Board 
is satisfied that this would be the case. There was no comment. 
 
3. The method of implementation will minimize impact to the wetland buffer. Mr. Wright said he 
is satisfied with that. 
 

8 | P a g e 
 
Mr. Hernick asked if the applicant is okay with waiving the 65-day rule so they can vote at the 
next meeting. Mr. Bruzga said as long as it is definitely voted on next time, he would be okay 
with it. 
 
Mr. Bedard and Mr. Wright both agreed it should be voted on at this meeting. Mr. Chadwick 
would love to have the vote happen this evening. 
 
Mr. Seaholm made a motion to wait to vote until the Chair is present. There was no second to the 
vote. 
 
Mr. Wright made a motion that the use cannot be implemented outside of the wetland 
buffer. Mr. Keane seconded the motion. All were in favor. 
 
Mr. Wright made a motion that the location in the wetland buffer will have the least 
impact. Mr. Keane seconded the motion. Mr. Hernick voted aye, Mr. Wright voted aye, 
Mr. Keane voted aye and Mr. Bedard voted aye. Mr. Seaholm voted nay. The vote passes 4-
1. 
 
Mr. Wright made a motion to approve the method of implementation will minimize impact 
to the wetland buffer. Mr. Bedard seconded the motion. All were in favor. 
 
Mr. Wright would like to add a condition regarding the well. Mr. Chadwick asked if it could be 
worded “as far as practical while still maintaining the 125’ setback). 
 
Mr. Wright suggested requiring the relocation of the well maintaining the 125’ setback but 
keeping away from the proximity of the swamp. 
 
Mr. Bedard made a motion to approve the conditional use permit with the condition as 
written above. Mr. Wright seconded the motion. All were in favor. 
 
Case 2026-005 – Final Approval-Minor Subdivision – Deborah Wheeler (owner), Patrick 
Dombroski (agent) for a Final Approval Subdivision/Annexation, proposing creating a new lot 
from existing 55-acre parcel for property located at 211 Brown Road, Tax Map 024-168-035. 
 
Mr. Hernick read the application for completeness. Mr. Hernick found the application complete. 
 
Mr. Hernick made a motion to accept the application. Mr. Wright seconded the motion. All 
were in favor.  
 
Mr. Dombroski said the lot is actually 60.2 acres rather than 55 acres. They would like to 
subdivide into two lots and to carve out a little more than 6 acres for a second lot. The Board had 
no questions for the applicant. 
 
Mr. Hernick opened up public input. There being none, he closed public input. 
 

9 | P a g e 
 
Mr. Wright made a motion to approve the subdivision as presented. Mr. Seaholm seconded 
the motion. All were in favor. 
 
The Board signed the mylar. 
 
Other Business: 
 
Mr. Wright made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Keane seconded the motion. All in favor. 
 
The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. 
 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
Donna S. Long 
Recording Secretary